Latest news with #AmericanBarAssociation
Los Angeles Times
2 days ago
- General
- Los Angeles Times
Free Legal Help for LA Wildfire Survivors
Wildfire survivors may run into insurance issues after losing their homes or fall prey to legal scams during the recovery process. If they are homeowners looking for representation or business owners needing help understanding applications, there are many free and reputable legal resources available to help Los Angeles County residents with their legal needs after a disaster. California has a toll-free disaster legal assistance hotline (1-888-382-3406) for anyone affected by wildfires, and there are no income restrictions. The hotline is part of the FEMA Disaster Legal Services program, which partners with the American Bar Association and legal aid groups to provide free legal help after federally declared disasters. You just need to leave a message to get a call back from a volunteer attorney. In Los Angeles, several established nonprofits offer free legal help to disaster survivors: You can find additional free or low-cost legal aid providers through the directory or by contacting the Los Angeles County Bar Association, which can refer you to pro bono disaster legal programs The Disaster Legal Services state website also provides legal information specific to California wildfires. The site has up-to-date guidance on topics like insurance claims, FEMA assistance, replacing documents, housing rights after fires, and consumer protection. It can point you toward local legal aid programs and self-help materials as well.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Pam Bondi Ends Bar Association Role in Trump Judicial Picks
President Donald Trump, accompanied by Pam Bondi, speaks before Bondi is sworn in as U.S. Attorney General in the Oval Office of the White House on Feb. 5, 2025, in Washington, D.C. Credit - Andrew Harnik—Getty Images The Department of Justice has announced that it will be curtailing the ability of the American Bar Association (ABA) to rate candidates for tenure in the federal judiciary. This will hinder the ABA's ability to vet nominations put forth by President Donald Trump. Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a letter to the ABA president William Bay on Thursday, May 29, that she is cutting off the association's access to non-public information about Trump nominees. Bondi referred to the non-partisan membership organization as an 'activist' group. 'Unfortunately, the ABA no longer functions as a fair arbiter of nominees' qualifications, and its ratings invariably and demonstrably favor nominees put forth by Democratic Administrations,' said Bondi, accusing the ABA of having 'bias' in its ratings process. 'There is no justification for treating the ABA differently from such other activist organizations and the Department of Justice will not do so.' Bondi went on to say that judicial nominees will no longer need to provide waivers to allow the ABA access to non-public information, nor will they respond to questionnaires or sit for interviews with the association. In a subsequent social media post, Bondi doubled down, saying: 'The American Bar Association has lost its way, and we do not believe it serves as a fair arbiter of judicial nominees. The Justice Department will no longer give the ABA the access they've taken for granted.' The move against the ABA came a day after Trump announced six new judicial nominees, which included top Justice Department official Emil Bove being put forward to serve as a Judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. In a post on Truth Social, Trump said that Bove 'will end the weaponization of Justice, restore the rule of law, and do anything else that is necessary to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.' Bove defended Trump during his hush-money trial, during which the President was convicted on 34 counts. Trump also nominated Kyle Dudek, John Guard, Jordan E. Pratt, and Anne-Leigh Gaylord Moe to serve as Judges on the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, and Ed Artau to serve as a Judge on the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The President has previously threatened to revoke the ABA's status as the federally-recognized accreditor of law schools in an Executive Order signed on April 24. As part of his wide-scale crackdown on DEI efforts, Trump said that the ABA has required law schools to demonstrate commitment to diversity and inclusion, something which he says is a "discriminatory requirement" and that "similar unlawful mandates must be permanently eradicated." Critics have recently raised concerns over current practices at the Department of Justice.'I think what's happening in the Department of Justice right now is that it's being transformed into Donald Trump's personal law firm," said Liz Oyer, the DOJ's former pardon attorney. "The Attorney General has made it clear that directions are coming from the very top, from the President, and she is there to do his bidding.' Read More: Democrats Grill AG Pick Pam Bondi Over Whether She Can Defy Trump Founded in 1878, the ABA works on the 'commitment to set the legal and ethical foundation for the American nation,' according to the organization's website. Its main three areas of focus revolve around advocating for the legal profession, eliminating bias and enhancing diversity, as well as advancing the rule of law. It is the ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary that typically oversees and conducts the judicial nominee vetting process, something it has done since 1953. According to the ABA, the committee 'makes a unique contribution to the vetting process by conducting a thorough peer assessment of each nominee's professional competence, integrity, and judicial temperament.' The organization asserts that these assessments are non-partisan, providing the Senate and sitting Administration with 'confidential assessments of the nominee's professional qualifications.' Contact us at letters@
Time Magazine
2 days ago
- Politics
- Time Magazine
Pam Bondi Curtails American Bar Association's Role in Vetting Trump's Judicial Nominees
The Department of Justice has announced that it will be curtailing the ability of the American Bar Association (ABA) to rate candidates for tenure in the federal judiciary. This will hinder the ABA's ability to vet nominations put forth by President Donald Trump. Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a letter to the ABA president William Bay on Thursday, May 29, that she is cutting off the association's access to non-public information about Trump nominees. Bondi referred to the non-partisan membership organization as an 'activist' group. 'Unfortunately, the ABA no longer functions as a fair arbiter of nominees' qualifications, and its ratings invariably and demonstrably favor nominees put forth by Democratic Administrations,' said Bondi, accusing the ABA of having 'bias' in its ratings process. 'There is no justification for treating the ABA differently from such other activist organizations and the Department of Justice will not do so.' Bondi went on to say that judicial nominees will no longer need to provide waivers to allow the ABA access to non-public information, nor will they respond to questionnaires or sit for interviews with the association. In a subsequent social media post, Bondi doubled down, saying: 'The American Bar Association has lost its way, and we do not believe it serves as a fair arbiter of judicial nominees. The Justice Department will no longer give the ABA the access they've taken for granted.' The move against the ABA came a day after Trump announced six new judicial nominees, which included top Justice Department official Emil Bove being put forward to serve as a Judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. In a post on Truth Social, Trump said that Bove 'will end the weaponization of Justice, restore the rule of law, and do anything else that is necessary to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.' Bove defended Trump during his hush-money trial, during which the President was convicted on 34 counts. Trump also nominated Kyle Dudek, John Guard, Jordan E. Pratt, and Anne-Leigh Gaylord Moe to serve as Judges on the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, and Ed Artau to serve as a Judge on the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The President has previously threatened to revoke the ABA's status as the federally-recognized accreditor of law schools in an Executive Order signed on April 24. As part of his wide-scale crackdown on DEI efforts, Trump said that the ABA has required law schools to demonstrate commitment to diversity and inclusion, something which he says is a "discriminatory requirement" and that "similar unlawful mandates must be permanently eradicated." Critics have recently raised concerns over current practices at the Department of Justice. 'I think what's happening in the Department of Justice right now is that it's being transformed into Donald Trump's personal law firm," said Liz Oyer, the DOJ's former pardon attorney. "The Attorney General has made it clear that directions are coming from the very top, from the President, and she is there to do his bidding.' What is the American Bar Association and what does it do? Founded in 1878, the ABA works on the 'commitment to set the legal and ethical foundation for the American nation,' according to the organization's website. Its main three areas of focus revolve around advocating for the legal profession, eliminating bias and enhancing diversity, as well as advancing the rule of law. It is the ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary that typically oversees and conducts the judicial nominee vetting process, something it has done since 1953. According to the ABA, the committee 'makes a unique contribution to the vetting process by conducting a thorough peer assessment of each nominee's professional competence, integrity, and judicial temperament.' The organization asserts that these assessments are non-partisan, providing the Senate and sitting Administration with 'confidential assessments of the nominee's professional qualifications.'
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Pam Bondi Locks Bar Association Out Of Vetting Trump's Judicial Nominees
WASHINGTON — Attorney General Pam Bondi on Thursday informed the American Bar Association that she is cutting off its access to nonpublic information about President Donald Trump's judicial nominees because she thinks the nonpartisan organization is an 'activist group.' 'Unfortunately, the ABA no longer functions as a fair arbiter of nominees' qualifications, and its ratings invariably and demonstrably favor nominees put forth by Democratic administrations,' Bondi said in a letter to ABA president William Bay. 'There is no justification for treating the ABA differently from such other activist organizations and the Department of Justice will not do so,' she said. 'Specifically, the Office of Legal Policy will no longer direct nominees to provide waivers allowing the ABA access to non-public information, including bar records. Nominees will also not respond to questionnaires prepared by the ABA and will not sit for interviews with the ABA.' An ABA spokesperson confirmed to HuffPost that the organization has seen the letter and has no comment for now, but the group will have one going forward. Here's a copy of Bondi's letter: Conservatives have bemoaned the ABA's ratings of judicial nominees for years, so Bondi's move isn't entirely surprising. President George W. Bush ended the the organization's veto power over his nominees in 2001, claiming it had a liberal bias. The group responded by evaluating Bush's nominees after they were submitted to the Senate. President Barack Obama restored the ABA's role in the judicial nomination process in March 2009. But contrary to Bondi's claims, the ABA isn't an activist group. It's a voluntary bar association of lawyers and law students nationwide. The ABA has been around since 1878, but it didn't play a role in federal judicial nominations until 1948. It launched its committee on the federal judiciary in 1953 and has since been vetting judicial nominees on a scale of 'not qualified' to 'well qualified.' A number of Trump's judicial picks earned embarrassing 'not qualified' ABA ratings in his first term, which is likely another reason why Bondi is shutting out the group. How can we forget Trump's former judicial nominee Brett Talley? The then 36-year-old lawyer and former paranormal activity investigator tweeted about Hillary Clinton being 'rotten' and said his solution to the Sandy Hook shooting massacre 'would be to stop being a society of pansies and man up.' There was Matthew Petersen, then a 36-year-old lawyer who couldn't answer basic questions about law in his confirmation hearing and was basically shamed into withdrawing his nomination. Jeff Mateer, then a 52-year-old lawyer who described transgender children as evidence of 'Satan's plan' and endorsed gay conversion therapy, was withdrawn too. Some of Trump's past judicial nominees did get through, though, despite being rated 'not qualified.' Sarah Pitlyk, then a 42-year-old lawyer and former clerk to then-D.C. Court of Appeals Judge Brett Kavanaugh, was unanimously rated 'not qualified' because of her 'very substantial gap' in trial or litigation experience. 'Ms. Pitlyk has never tried a case as lead or co-counsel, whether civil or criminal. She has never examined a witness,' reads Pitlyk's ABA review in 2019. 'Though Ms. Pitlyk has argued one case in a court of appeals, she has not taken a deposition. She has not argued any motion in a state or federal trial court. She has never picked a jury. She has never participated at any stage of a criminal matter.' Republicans still confirmed her to her seat on a U.S. District Court in Missouri. There was also Lawrence VanDyke, then a 46-year-old lawyer and former solicitor general of both Nevada and Montana. The ABA interviewed 60 people in its evaluation of VanDyke, including 43 lawyers and 16 judges. It found that his colleagues 'would not say affirmatively that he would be fair to any litigant before him, notably members of the LGBTQ community.' 'Mr. VanDyke's accomplishments are offset by the assessments of interviewees that Mr. VanDyke is arrogant, lazy, an ideologue, and lacking in knowledge of the day-to-day practice including procedural rules,' reads the particularly brutal ABA review of VanDyke in 2019. 'There was a theme that the nominee lacks humility, has an 'entitlement' temperament, does not have an open mind, and does not always have a commitment to being candid and truthful.' VanDyke cried during his Senate nomination hearing when these details were read back to him. Still, despite the ABA's findings, Republicans confirmed him to his current seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. Beyond any lingering grievances Trump may have against the ABA from his first term, he may also just be straight-up retaliating against the group for condemning his brazen attacks on federal judges and on the rule of law itself. In March, the ABA president issued an unusual statement criticizing unnamed Trump administration officials for making 'repeated calls for the impeachment of judges who issue opinions with which the government does not agree.' 'There are clear choices facing our profession. We can choose to remain silent and allow these acts to continue or we can stand for the rule of law and the values we hold dear,' Bay said. 'We acknowledge that there are risks to standing up and addressing these important issues. But if the ABA and lawyers do not speak, who will speak for the organized bar?' 'Who will speak for the judiciary?' he said. 'Who will protect our system of justice? If we don't speak now, when will we speak?'
The Hill
3 days ago
- Politics
- The Hill
DOJ cutting American Bar Association access to judicial nominees
Attorney General Pam Bondi told the American Bar Association (ABA) Thursday that the Trump administration would no longer cooperate as the organization vets its judicial nominees. The letter accuses the bar association of failing to 'fix the bias in its rating process,' a claim that follows the organization labeling some Trump nominees as unqualified for the bench. 'Unfortunately, the ABA no longer functions as a fair arbiter of nominees' qualifications, and its ratings invariably and demonstrably favor nominees put forth by Democratic administrations,' Bondi wrote in a letter to ABA President William Bay. 'Accordingly, while the ABA is free to comment on judicial nominations along with other activist organizations, there is no justification for treating the ABA differently from such other activist organizations and the Department of Justice will not do so. Specifically, the Office of Legal Policy will no longer direct nominees to provide waivers allowing the ABA access to non-public information, including bar records. Nominees will also not respond to questionnaires prepared by the ABA and will not sit for interviews with the ABA,' she added. The ABA did not respond to a request for comment. The White House took a similar stance during President Trump's first term in office. According to Ballotpedia, the ABA rated 264 of Trump's nominees, finding187 were rated 'well-qualified,' 67 were rated 'qualified,' and 10 were rated 'not qualified.' Though a small figure, that stands in contrast with other recent administrations, who had at most three unqualified picks during their time in office. The Trump administration has taken a number of actions targeting the ABA. An executive order from Trump directed Education Secretary Linda McMahon to consider whether to suspend the ABA's role as a law school accreditor. The organization also sued over the stripping of grant funding that limited its training programs abroad, as well as another at the Justice Department for victims of domestic and sexual violence. In the DOJ case, the judge found the targeting of the ABA violated the group's first amendment rights. 'The government does not meaningfully contest the merits of the ABA's First Amendment retaliation claim. It points to no deficiencies in the ABA's performance of its grant obligations,' Judge Christopher Cooper, an Obama appointee, wrote in the opinion. 'It concedes that similar grants administered by other organizations remain in place. It agrees that bringing a lawsuit is protected by the First Amendment. And it suggests no other cause for the cancellation apart from the sentiments expressed by Deputy Attorney General Blanche in his memorandum,' he added.
